memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Memory Alpha:Ten Forward/Archive 2005
A way to let people know where the important, incomplete pages are It seems that we still have some very important pages which are very incomplete. Bajor, for example. How can we inform other archvists where and what these pages are so that we can complete our database? (I have been working on some of these pages such as the Q Continuum, and completing them, but in order for everything to be compelted, we will need a system to tell people which pages are incomplete. July 1, 2005 User:Tobyk777 :A few pages like this exist, you know: -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 18:59, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC) Article records Are the articles that hit a certain number of viewing recorded somewhere? I just noticed that the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine article has been viewed more than twenty thousand times. Was the 10,000th article recorded? Excelsior 10:53, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC) :Individual page hits can be found here: . The 10,000th article wasn't recorded automatically, but a user posted it here a while ago. Apparently, this topic has been (re)moved. -- Cid Highwind 11:28, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC) :: I was thinking more along the lines of a special page (a hall of fame if you will) that would show the articles that hit a certain number of hits. The DS9 page hitting 20,000 is excellent is it not? It should be recorded for posterity. Tough Little Ship 23:26, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC) ::: The 10,000th article topic was apparently deleted by an anonymous user without being archived, but I've recovered it and placed it in the archive. For the record, T'Pring was the 10,000th article. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 01:26, 10 Jul 2005 (UTC) Contradictory info There are many bits of info in star Trek which lack consistency. For example: 1. In Voyager it says that the Breen use biological based ships like Spiecies 8472, but in DS9 it shows metal ships flying through space. 2. Damar and Wayoun aruge over the climate of the Breen Homeworld, but in a previous episode Dukat states that there is a Cardasssian embassy on Breen These are just 2 examples. What should writers do about these Contradictions while wrtiting artciles? :For #1 i would ask you: is it entirely impossible that the breen have used two different types of ships in their history? -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 06:39, 10 Jul 2005 (UTC) ::If the information is indeed contradictory, both facts should be noted, accompanied by a small note stating the contradiction. No speculation. -- Cid Highwind 11:54, 22 Jul 2005 (UTC) Dutch MA reaches 1,000 articles Oh joy is us! The Dutch Memory Alpha has reached 1,000 articles. Things have been slow on the Dutch wiki since we started, but three more or less continuous contributors with admin rights are keeping the RC filled. A change may be just around the corner. The 1,000th article was Portas V. -- Redge | ''Overleg'' 12:22, 12 Jul 2005 (UTC) :You know I could slap myself that I didn't start nl:2293 three articles earlier ;) Congrats, Dutch MA is finally no longer asleep -- Kobi - [[ :Kobi|( )]] 12:49, 12 Jul 2005 (UTC) Template formatting Just a small note: Any formatting regularly applied to templates should, in my opinion, be added to the template itself. For example, don't simply write : . If you want to have that message indented (which looks nice), add it to the message template instead. This makes it easier to change the template later, should there be any need to do so... -- Cid Highwind 12:36, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC) : Oy, there are so many articles already where its already been manually indented its probably more advantageous to configure one of our bots to handle a change like that. — THOR 13:04, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC) ::Yes a bot can handle that. It is actually a very important hint, because when we changed our templates to something more prominent (see de:Bild:Enterprise_im_dock_tmp.jpg for example) all the templates were broken, because we did import that style unfortunately I suggest to change it, it is actually a nice job for the bot, though one which should be done when America is asleep... -- Kobi - [[ :Kobi|( )]] 15:42, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC) OK, then - can you get Morn to do this? Preferably, move any to its own line while removing any leading ":" characters? Or do we need another hack for that? ;) -- Cid Highwind 11:52, 22 Jul 2005 (UTC) Policy Reminder - Summary field I think it is necessary to remind ourselves of the policies from time to time. Policy of the day: Always fill summary field Whenever I have a look at the "Recent changes", only about 10-20% of the edits contain an edit summary. Please, try to use that feature more often and, if possible, try to make the summary meaningful by really describing what exactly you changed on the page. Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 09:29, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) :Also, I would discourage archivists from marking major changes to an article as "minor" -- there are a few who have never made a non-minor article edit, but also never even tried to use the summary field. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 13:38, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) Please, try to use that summary field... It's useful! -- Cid Highwind 13:06, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC) Everyone who is too lazy to use the summary field should have a look on my user page ;-) --Memory 19:21, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC) Images to be used on episode articles (Copied from Memory Alpha:Nominations for featured articles. -- Cid Highwind) :I didn't really want to discuss the issue of images here, but can think of no better place, as it's quite relevant to some of the comments above. I think we need to decide what kind of images are preferable for episode articles, and what images supplement write-ups. Images of characters, technology, situations? What do you/other users prefer? Please reply to this, as it's probably quite important for future nominations of episode pages and MA as a whole. --Defiant | ''Talk'' 12:51, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC) ::I for one prefer that the first order of business when getting pictures from the episode is to get portrait quality shots of all characters, props, and most important sets, graphics, models or effects. This should be a first priority. The rule of thumb (basically, our self imposed limit according to policy) is that each article on Memory Alpha should probably have no more than three pictures attached to it (and be of sufficient length and importance to list the pictures), however, episode articles can have many more because each episode links to dozens of references, each of which (under the rule of thumb on pictures) could have one or two pictures used by it, taken from the episode itself. ::I try to interpret this as "each episode summary should have no more than two or three pictures on that episode's article that cannot be used by any other article." ::This includes a title card image, which is specific to the episode and probably couldn't be used by many other pages, if at all. While it may seem a little limiting to only use 2 or so "reaction shots" (shots specific to the episode where you can see action from the episode progressing), remember that if you choose reaction shots well, you can make them useful to three or so other articles. (If you find a picture of O'Brien shouting with his fist in the air, it might not be useful to any page but the page for "Episode X", as an archivist working for pictures on page Miles O'Brien would prefer it be more "portrait-like" and less "action-like" -- But if you find a picture of Miles in uniform, shouting, holding a(n unobscured) phaser rifle -- then you may find the picture used supplementarily on phaser rifle, Starfleet uniform or Dominion War. ::You get the ideas guys -- find pics with context, and try to follow links to articles about ships or technology and find if there's an action shot that would benefit your episode summary, or if an action shot from your episode summary could benefit a technology or character page. Conversely, anyone who uses an episode screenshot to illustrate tech, ships, sets or costumes could follow back to the episode it came from in order to benefit an episode summary someone else is contributing to. (Keeping in mind extra character shots on episode pages have been discouraged by discussion, unless they are placed to specifically note the introduction or landmark of the character in the background info/cast section). -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 15:11, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC) :::On episode pages, I would prefer that all images on the page serve some sort of purpose for illustration that cannot be otherwise given in the text. For example, the "Force of Nature" article does this with the diagrams of the Hekaras Corridor and the damage to subspace. However, shots of otherwise unremarkable or unimportant action, like the group at the conference table or the viewscreen shots, don't seem to add anything to the article and seem to be simply ornamental. Nothing uniquely special or important is happening. The only place I think these sorts of images are appropriate are the "title card" images in the info table Captainmike mentions; I think that space can be used for an image that would otherwise serve no purpose in the article (and maybe not in any other articles) but capture an important idea, theme, or event in the episode (as I previously noted, the image of Geordi with the Enterprise warp core would be perfect for "Force of Nature"). Also, I don't think we should feel pressured to include all screenshots from a particular episode on the page unless, again, there is a specific need to do so; otherwise it clutters the page and slows the download for those on dialup. Star Trek: Generations is beginning to suffer from this problem. I also think efforts should be made to consolidate images whenever possible or appropriate. On "Force of Nature," there are images of Rabal and Serova together and apart, plus other portraits of them at their individual articles. Why not use the image of the two together on all three pages and point out the individuals in captions? Basically, discretion should be used... it's okay to upload images for one certain purpose, but only if there's a definite need for them. ::: And on a final somewhat related, somewhat unrelated note, I'd like to point out that as of late it seems as if egos are coming to blow around here and short fuses and sarcasm have become extremely common... remember, we're all working for the same goal and there's no need to become upset! Please try to respect the contributions and opinions of others and don't be afraid to use the talk page whenever there's an edit conflict. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 02:33, 14 Jul 2005 (UTC) :::: On the subject of images, I personally think that too many people are taking them from Trekpulse, and that screencaps should be used more than they currently are. This would mean that copyright issues could be completely avoided and that the pictures on this site would be unique. --Defiant | ''Talk'' 13:39, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC) ::::: Aren't we all using the same material for our purposes? I don't mean to be difficult, it's just that technically none of us has any usage rights other than fair use. Incidentally, my program gets 576x432px resolution whereas I just visited their site and a screencap from there is 692x530px, so I can understand the tendency to borrow. :) -Schrei 09:14, 30 Jul 2005 (UTC) ::::: Defiant, I don't see any real problem with using images from TrekPulse or from the old STINSV archives because those images are all screencaps of ST episodes -- the site "TrekPulse" doesn't really have any "rights" to them whatsoever -- how could they? the image is still owned by Paramount whether TrekPulse screencapped it or I screencapped it. ITs still nice to owe them a link as attribution for their work getting it, but TrekPulse did the same thing we do: "steal" the images off the DVDs. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 14:36, 5 Aug 2005 (UTC) Naming I feel that in episode descriptions featuring breakdowns into Acts, the sequence before the opening credits should be referred to as the " Cold Opening" as opposed to the "teaser". What is the general opinion on this( If any)? (User:Gul Reid; sig added) : I don't have any opinion on it per sé, although I am curious as to the meaning of "Cold Opening", it just strikes me as interesting. — THOR 20:12, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC) : I've heard it on DVD commentaries. I suppose it means the opening is "cold", as without the credits the viewer does not nescerraily know what the progamme is. Gul Reid 21:08, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC) ::Teaser is the correct scriptwriting terminology for the brief intro before the opening credits. See http://www.writersmarket.com/encyc/T.asp#1174 or, for use in a script http://www.st-minutiae.com/academy/literature329/163.txt. Cold open refers to the technique, rather than the actual section of teleplay (see ). The teaser of "Cause and Effect" is an excellent demonstration of said technique - the viewer is dropped right into the middle of the action with no knowledge of how it began. -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 21:13, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC) :::I think that the teaser for "Cause and Effect" is one of the best examples of a teaser - it was nothing short of shocking, IMHO. The teasers for "Contagion", "A Matter of Perspective", "First Contact", "Time's Arrow, Part I", "Face of the Enemy" and "Scorpion, Part I" are excellent examples of teaser techniques.--Scimitar 17:58, 16 Jul 2005 (UTC) : Well, I guess all the above settles it. Thanks for your input. Gul Reid 21:22, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC) :Although both are correct terminology they maby should simply be left away. (the naming itself not the text) So you only need the Act parts or similar named chapters. -- Q 16:54, 16 Jul 2005 (UTC) Scripts I've noticed a lot of contributers seem to have access to shooting scripts. Is there a website archive of these or something? I would enjoy reading such scripts. Gul Reid 22:04, 15 Jul 2005 (UTC) : Here is were I got them from. -- Q 16:43, 16 Jul 2005 (UTC) : TOS transcripts can be found here. Jan Pedersen 08:10, 21 Jul 2005 (UTC) Spellings? I've noticed that many of the contributions I've made to MA are always "corrected" when I put words like "recognise" or "italicise" to the US spelling (z''' instead of '''s). I know that MA is North American-based but is there a spelling convention as well?--Scimitar 15:54, 16 Jul 2005 (UTC) : It's a US based TV show, with writers writing the scripts in American-English and (I guess) M/A keeps the articles written in the same format of English for consistantancy. The only mention of this I could find was something I brought up several months ago here, with essentially the same response by one of our co-founders. --Alan del Beccio 23:18, 21 Jul 2005 (UTC) New Zealand Hey there, I was woundering if anyone out there knows when/if ST:ENT is being released in NZ on DVD. The guardian of Forever moved to Talk:Guardian of Forever Talk:Main Page - Please contribute I want to redesign the Main Page in the near future. If you have any comments to make about the existing or possible new content, please visit Talk:Main Page. Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 14:30, 21 Jul 2005 (UTC) :I've added a subsection to Talk:Main Page that was here is Ten-Forward -- but archived before anyone could comment further. It deals with sorting technology topics differently and making the article technology available from the main page -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 16:18, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC) "Title card" images The use and usefulness of "title card" images was brought up on Image talk:Enterprise and rogue comet.jpg. Do we need an image for each episode title? Please discuss here. -- Cid Highwind 10:48, 27 Jul 2005 (UTC) There is no need. It would take up too much space and most images would be identical, just with different titles.Gul Reid 15:39, 30 Jul 2005 (UTC) *I believe every episode should have atleast 1 Pic in the data table that reflects the episode in general, but the title carfd shots are usually worthless.--Kahless 18:48, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC) Star Trek Books I am new and I was wondering if star trek books that are done with paramounts ok are considered as usable in writing articles.If not,why? :You already seem to have a grasp of the answer. The only things usable for writing articles are episodes and movies. If it hasnt been made into a TV or theater production by the Paramount Pictures studio itself, it is not considered canon. (Memory Alpha:Canon policy) -- and therefore, none of the books are relevant to our articles (except of course for the article about that book). This means, for example, you can create an article about the publiction data of The Final Reflection, but neither Paramount nor this database considers it valid enough to list information from it in Klingons or D5 class -- because it is "non-canon". -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 14:39, 1 Aug 2005 (UTC) Ferengi Philosophy This page was deleted recently (though it still has some links to it) and I was thinking of re-adding it but wanted to post here first since it was deleted once already. I've been re-watching a lot of Ferengi episodes lately and while the last article was a one-sentence summary (and I was one of the ones who voted to delete), I do feel there is enough to expand the article and make it worth having its own page. There's enough material on Ferengi ethics, business practices, and social philosophy that doesn't easily fit into any other page but currently lacks reference in most Ferengi areas. Like I said, a head's up more than anything but since it was deleted once I thought I should mention it. Logan 5 20:59, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC) :A compromise: Create Ferengi philosophy as a redirect to Ferengi and start a section Ferengi philosophy there. We can always move the content if it is enough to deserve its own article. -- Cid Highwind 21:10, 3 Aug 2005 (UTC) :I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Highwind. The Ferengi article covers religious beliefs, but is a bit light on temporal beliefs and practices. A philosophy section should be erected at once! --Werideatdusk 08:18, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC) :I agress make it a re-direct and reate the section in the Ferrengi article atleast for now--Kahless 18:44, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC) Links to Alpha or Beta Quadrant article There are many location articles which state a location in either AQ or BQ as definite (see "What links here" for AQ and BQ) although this was never mentioned in canon. Often, this is just personal speculation. I suggest to check all these articles - if nothing definite about the location was said, we could instead link to an article (called Local space, for example) that basically states that the location is "somewhere in the neighborhood" and links to both Alpha Quadrant and Beta Quadrant. -- Cid Highwind 14:24, 5 Aug 2005 (UTC) References I'd like to point out that Logan 5 has been moving references from articles into lists at the the bottom of the page (example Ferengi), while Gvsualan has been running about doing the opposite and removing reference lists (example Breen). Is one of these users in violation or is there no standard? As a regular user of MA I find I am sometimes wondering where info comes from and would therefore like to see the in-article info kept, at the same time I am also sometimes wondering which episodes a certain species has been referenced in and would therefore like to see the lists kept. Would it be difficult to simply leave both types of citing in place? Jaf 13:47, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)Jaf :Linking from within an article is important to see where a specific bit of information came from - we're losing that information if we are just using lists at the bottom. I agree with Gvsualan here, and think that this is a part of some policy somewhere (at least we discussed this already). Double references could be a solution, although I don't know if they are necessary in all cases - let's discuss this further. -- Cid Highwind 13:53, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC) Speculation vs. Analysis I was reading Memory Alpha:What Memory Alpha is not and #2 on the part about MA articles (personal speculation) made me wonder about an article I wrote. I added a subsection to Paradise called Analysis and I might have pushed the envelope of an encyclopedia vs. a critical review... I'm not sure. There probably isn't an issue with that particular article, but I want to clarify for the future, which is why I posted here instead of its talk page. --Schrei 05:50, 13 Aug 2005 (UTC) : In my opinion, it's the wrong side of the line, I'm afraid. It definitely comes through as a review of the episode rather than part of a description of it - very much a critical piece, especially the discussions on symbolism and name origins. I won't remove the section just yet, to see what other opinions are, but I don't believe it is suitable for inclusion here. -- Michael Warren | ''Talk'' 19:29, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC) : I see nothing wrong with analysis as long as it is marked as such. The same goes for speculation, as long as it is clearly. I shall give some examples using the Vorta: ' Analysis ' '' Analysis of the episode in which the Vorta appear leads to the conclusion that almost all Vorta are probably clones. '' ' Speculation ' '' Since Vorta have no need to reproduce sexually, they might be sterile. '' The important thing is that the articles must clearly distinguish analysis and speculation from canon, and the speculation and analysis must follow from canon. The analysis of Schrei definitely adds positively to Paradise. Imagine how much The Measure of a Man would benefit from analysis of the philosophical questions it raises. — — Ŭalabio‽ 00:28, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) After reading Walabio's post, I re-read my analysis portion and I'm still ambilvalent about its encyclopedianess, if nothing else then for the length/depth. Maybe strike the second paragraph (is Depending on one's point of view, Alixus's name can be interpreted as the embodiment of her self-image as an "elixir" for the colonists' dependency on technology inherently POV?) and keep the first. If you deem the entire section inappropriate, you should add a 6th item to the list of what MA articles aren't. --Schrei 01:46, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) I think Tribunal probably gives a good example of a compromise between critique and book report, dunno what other people think though. Other articles' background info looks limited to obvious stuff like continuity errors and "this character didn't appear in the episode." --Schrei 01:50, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) :I've never seen the episode in question, and reading the brief analysis does not make me form an opinion one way or the other about the quality of the episode, so I don't think we have to worry about the section coming off as a type of review with the intent of expressing a positive or negative opinion. That said, the tone still comes off different from that of a typical MA article. Perhaps someone can rewrite it to save some of the symbolism speculation but remove the critical tone? Bullet points may help. Much of what is there is no different than some of the notes which can be found in many of the TOS episode background info. -- SmokeDetector47 // ''talk'' 17:53, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC) Photographic Mistake - USS Yeager I don't pretend to be a Star Trek guru so I thought I'd get some confirmation first. I typed in 'USS Yeager' and when that page came up there was a screencap on it from a DS9 episode supposedly showing the Yeager-class near Deep Space Nine. The Yeager-class is essentially an Intrepid-class saucer (Voyager) 'bolted' onto a Marquis raider's hull which is of a greater scale. But the photograph on this page looks an awful lot like an Akira-class starship (note the nacelles and the 'pod'). I know for sure that it's not a Yeager-class starship and I was wondering if anyone else noticed this. Other than that, no complaints. Great site guys (and girls, presumably). :There is a discussion at Image talk:USS Yeager DS9.jpg on this very subject. --Alan del Beccio 08:32, 14 Aug 2005 (UTC) Table Design In creating The X-Files Wiki, I was wondering if I could use or adapt Memory Alpha's design for the "browser" class table, so that episodes can link to the next and previous ones (like here on Memory Alpha). However, I'm not very adept at code, so could someone paste the necessary programming for a "browser" class table here, please? --Defiant | ''Talk'' 21:40, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC) Featured Article Accessibility Ive noticed that on the Main page, there is only 1 (Hard to find) link to featured articles. Even after clicking on that you have to click anohter link to get to the complete list. I am sure that there are many MA users who just browse (for info on Trek) and don't edit. For these users (but also for interactive users)I think that there should be a more obivous link to our featured articles. They're supposed to be "featured", as in "On Display" but really, they're not on display, and for newcomers hard to acess, (Especialy if the newcomer doesn't know they exist.) Mabe on the Main Page we could have 5 or 6 Featured articles listed, then a large link which says more featured articles, To fix this problem. Tobyk777 05:13, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) * Perhaps we could see to adding "Featured article nominees" to the Utilities links in the 'recent changes text' and, in turn, removing the " " link? It would look something like this: 'updated recent changes text'. --Alan del Beccio 05:36, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) * I agree; I know I personally don't go hunting (specifically) the "old pages" to often. I like the "recent changes" idea. Although to pick hairs, maybe put it between "New pages" and "Pages needing an attention". - AJHalliwell 05:45, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) ** I'm not just talking about the aceesiblity of voting on the nominations. I think we need a system where the acutal articles are "Featured" in the greatest sense of the word. Tobyk777 17:54, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) ***We already have that on the "article of the week" on the Main Page-- from which point they are very easily accessable. The whol point of the main page is that it is going to be the first place new members visit. --Alan del Beccio 21:14, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) ** The main page only displays one featured article, and only part of it. I just think that the rest of them should be a little more "Featured". I don't think that in our current setup the "featured articles are any more featured than the non-featured articles. *** I see no problem with how things currently are. The whole point of the partial featured article on the front page is to get the reader to want to read the rest of it within -- a rather common writing/newsarticle/newsbroadcast tactic. A link to the list of featured articles is on the front page; you cant get much more featured than having an entire list of featured articles. If you want to read the whole article, go to the articles page, otherwise, why create duplicate pages with duplicate content... --Alan del Beccio 08:16, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC) IE glitching I worked on the Henry Starling article for quite a while, and have even [[Memory Alpha:Nominations for featured articles#Henry_Starling|nominated it for FA status]]. However, on my talk page Tough Little Ship noted that there was a problem in the page. I'll copy that conversation here: : Hi. In the Starling article, I moved a couple of the images so that there wouldn't be so many gaps. Its better now, but theres a big gap between the Nixon info and the rest. Tough Little Ship 22:34, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) :: That ''is strange. I couldn't see it at all, and since I couldn't figure out what you were seeing, I brought up the page in Internet Explorer and could see the glitch. That's really odd, as I don't know what would be causing that, the page parses properly in both Firefox and Safari. I'll drop a line in 10F and see if anybody has any ideas. Thanks! — THOR 23:06, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)'' This is the article as it appears properly in Firefox (shown) as well as Safari This is the article as it appears in Internet Explorer from my work computer (my apologies for image quality: mspaint) Does anybody have any ideas as to what the problem could be, and better yet, how to fix it? — THOR 23:06, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC) : If you place the images together like this, at the top of the page,: :: :: :: : you get an IE page that looks similar to your Mozilla page. I'm not sure how it works on Mozilla or Firefox, but it looks alright on my Internet Explorer. The only downside would be that the images wouldn't be connected to the section of text it's about, but the article is small enough, that it won't make a difference.--Tim Thomason 00:10, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC) :Yep, that's a well known problem, appeared also in an old version of "Broken Bow", see Talk. One way to solve it is to stack all image links at the top of the article - but this causes problems with Opera, because if there are headings and subheadings the "edit" buttons on the right end of them are pushed down to the bottom of the page (don't ask me why, I don't get this). That's not the case here, but if, you have to arrange it like the "table-gallery" on Dixon Hill (holonovel) (Intrepid class is another example I've found right away). Maybe an update of the wiki software might fix all this some day. --Memory 00:20, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC) : Thanks everybody! It hadn't occurred to me that since all the images were top-right aligned anyway that I could just simply list them in order at the beginning of the article. I wish we could drop them down a line w/o futzing everything up, but all's well in the end I suppose. Again, thanks a lot youse guys! — THOR 01:25, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)